lfnfandomcom-20200216-history
Forum:Vicipedia
Me ia demanda ce nos nesesa per ave la Vici e la responde ia es: : I would also like to confirm the time that a Wiki has to stay on Incubator before final approval. I am adding articles every day and I remember that for the Jamaican Patois one the time was two or three months of continuous work. Is that the amount of time? We have already finished traslating all the messages needed so I presume that it is just a matter of time. ::: The definition is "at least 3 active editors (they can be different each month, but it should continuously be 3) for the course of at least several months", which means at least 3 months (but the committee has some leeway in its decision). Nos debe es tre scrivente per tre menses per ave la Vici, me crede ce nos pote fa lo. --Chabi (talk) 22:57, January 28, 2017 (UTC) *Me regrete ce tota mea tempo libre a presente es ocupada con prepara la disionario per primi. Me ia regarda corta la mesajes traduida: los conteni alga gramatica vea ("ce" per "cual") e speles vea (privadia, relateda). Simon ** Esta mesajes pote es cambiada an pos la crea de la Vicipedia. No ave problema, la disionario es plu importante ca la Vicipedia, e pos es editada, tu ta pote aida en la Vicipedia (an scrivente un article peti cada dia o cada semana es bon). --Chabi (talk) 10:24, January 29, 2017 (UTC) ** A, bon – me pote probable fa acel. Simon * Me ia ajunta la model a tota la paises. Me va atenta no crea articles nova e me va ajunta informa a aceles ce ja esiste per ave plu cualia. Me ia parla con un manejor e ia dise a me ce nos debe ave articles plu grande en loca de plu cuantia (nos ave 1543 articles). Me va demanda en un semana per vide si nosa Vici ta pote es aprobada. Me grasia a totas, spesial a Simon, per vosa aida. --Chabi (talk) 09:33, May 16, 2017 (UTC) ---- Me ia demanda sur la aprova de la Vici e la responde ce me ia reseta es esta: : I can nudge the LangCom a little. But I need to tell you: I set my project to Wp/lfn, then hit ten random pages, and they were all stubs. LangCom is going to be reluctant to approve a project that is all stubs. Try to focus in the next little while on making the pages you have more complete, rather than just creating more stubs. I don't know how long to suggest—another month, maybe. At this point it's not so much "how many pages" or "how many contributors", though you need to keep those things up. It's that LangCom is going to want to see a decent percentage of pages with substantial content. Me va atenta ajunta plu informa a la articles ce ja esiste. --Chabi (talk) 22:11, April 25, 2017 (UTC) La responde cual tu ia reseta indica la problem fundal de esta projeta. La crea de un bon ensiclopedia es un labora vasta, enorme, jigante! E la fato es ce elefen no ave un cuantia sufisinte de parlores fluente (e interesada par la taxe) per reali lo con cualia alta. Lo no sufisi ce on prende testo de la vicipedia espaniol e ajunta mal traduis de lo. An si vicipedia ta aseta nos, la resulta ta es an plu labora per continua la projeta. Me deveni sempre plu depresada par la idea. (O cisa mea problem es ce me emprende personal tro multe taxes :-) En pasa, me vide ce la plu de pajes en la vicipedias ido, interlingua e lojban es jermes (stubs). Simon Me va lasa crea nova articles e ajunta informas a la article ce nos ja ave. Cuando nos ia crea la Vicipedia en jamaican, multa articles ia es jermes, e los ia no ave problemes. --Chabi (talk) 08:29, April 26, 2017 (UTC) Jamaican ave plu ca 3 milion parlores. Elefen ave min ca 300. Me es serta ce la comites de vicipedia considera tal fatos en sua judis. Simon : Mea idea es ce nosa vici ta debe ave plu cualia e per esta me va lasa crea articles nova car nos ja ave plu ca 1000 articles.´Me va ajunta nova informa. --Chabi (talk) 21:34, May 16, 2017 (UTC) :: I totally understand your frustration and dissappointment regarding the situation of our Wikipedia but it will just take a bit longer. I will try to focus on just one article: to improve it and add quality content to it so that we could present it as a featured one. As it is no longer a problem of quantity but of quality, working in this way will also allow you to finish correcting the remaining articles. Chabi (talk) 22:44, May 16, 2017 (UTC) ::: My problem is that I'm a perfectionist (not recommended!) and I can see no point in promoting a bad encyclopedia. It feels like opening a new shop full of broken goods. Esperanto's Wikipedia doesn't give me hope: it has far more people working on it, but yet still manages to be appallingly badly written, with people apparently translating sentences word-for-word from their native languages. A few weeks ago, you said the Wikipedia administrator told you that the main problem is that most of our articles are stubs; if you take just one or two articles and improve their quality, that will still leave the same problem. And if we do get the thumbs-up from Wikipedia, you and I (and perhaps the occasional short-lived helper) will be left struggling to maintain a live encyclopedia. It will rapidly get out of date and look silly (in the same way that the country pages currently look silly because they tell us what the population was twelve years ago, which is when they were added into the earliest Elefen wiki). You seem to have a fabulous amount of time to spend on Elefen (are you retired?) – but I have to fit it in around my many other activities, so (sadly!) can't devote nearly as much time to it as I would like. Simon * A few weeks ago, you said the Wikipedia administrator told you that the main problem is that most of our articles are stubs; if you take just one or two articles and improve their quality, that will still leave the same problem. I am sorry because maybe I didn't make it clear, what I meant is that I will be improving ALL 1,000 articles little by little. That's why I won't be creating any new one. It will take time, but I think it is worth it. * It will rapidly get out of date and look silly (in the same way that the country pages currently look silly because they tell us what the population was twelve years ago, which is when they were added into the earliest Elefen wiki). That's a problem every single Wikipedia has (and even those for languages widely spoken). However, is that's an issue, we can add the year on the template (Population xxx (2007)) or, if that really bothers you, we can get rid of it, whatever you prefer and add a simple template with data that doesn't change (capital, type of government, official languages, internet code). **adding the year sounds like the best idea. also, it seems odd to keep that sort of information in the body of the text. things like population should only be in the templates. jorj * You seem to have a fabulous amount of time to spend on Elefen (are you retired?) - No, I am not, but I try to take time from every free moment I have. I now you are busy mainly with the dictionary and correcting text on the Incubator, that's why I am translating literature and I will try to improve already existing articles. I will put a template ( ) on the only article I will be writing on. The reason why I put so much interest on this Wikipedia project is because is an invaluable advertisement for the language. You cannot imagine the amount of people we can make LFN known just by having a Wikipedia. That's the reason why I put son much time on it. Don't worry about once is approved, let's focus ourselves on get it approved. **I hope you can keep working on it. When I tried to get lfn approved many years ago, we almost had enough support, but they told us we needed an SIL abbreviation. When we got that, they told us it wasn't enough, and suggested Wikia. jorj **one thing you should make clear is that although you are the main contributor to the incubator wiki, many of the articles were originally authored by others and were moved from our wiki. that way they won't think that we don't have many editors/authors. here are some stats for the wiki: jorj *** >10,000 edits - 3 editors *** 1,000 to 9,999 edits - 5 *** 100 to 999 edits - 14 *** 1 to 99 edits - 29 *** to 9 edits - 16 *** since 1-1-2017 - 17 editors *** 3794 pages **** 10,000 - 100,000 bytes - 254 **** 5000 - 10,000 bytes - 192 *********I know but they don't care about that, what is important for them is the amount of editors that are currently working on the project. We need a minimum of three. I am also taking the opportunity to thank you for all your work, without your help this wouldn't be possible. I totally understand your frustration, but let's try to get it done. Thanks again. Chabi (talk) 11:26, May 17, 2017 (UTC) Me ia crea otra model per la paises plu jeneral, con informas ce no cambia. tu pote vide lo asi. Esce tu prefere esta model? Tal nos pote lasa lo e no va nesesa fa cambias plu tarda. --Chabi (talk) 08:34, May 18, 2017 (UTC) *Me no ia atende multe tua ativia sur modeles (pardona!), donce me no es serta con cual otra model tu vole ce me compara esta nova. Ma me ia visita la paje Bielarus (un esemplo acaso) e sua caxa pare conteni plu informas ca tua model nova. Simon * Yes, I know, the difference is that the new one has fixed pieces of information (no names of governors, no GDP, no population figures) because those are the ones who become outdated. That's a way of solving the problem abovementioned (It will rapidly get out of date and look silly (in the same way that the country pages currently look silly because they tell us what the population was twelve years ago, which is when they were added into the earliest Elefen wiki) I believe. --Chabi (talk) 13:22, May 18, 2017 (UTC) *I see what you're saying, now. Yes, that makes sense. Over the last few months, I haven't really been looking at the contents of the infoboxes. I was becoming more concerned by the fact that the bodies of the country articles say things like "La cuantia de abitores en 2006 ia es sirca 12345678 persones" — where it's also a bit crazy to say "sirca" ("approximately") followed by an impossibly exact number! It would certainly make sense to move raw statistics like this over to the infobox instead. Simon *On a related matter, I find it strange that Wikipedia tends to cram as much information as possible into the first sentence of an article, typically in a clumsy lengthy bracket before the sentence has even reached the word "is". I see this tendency starting to appear in the Elefen articles, too, e.g. at Albert Einstein. Surely a person's birth and death dates belong in an infobox, or could be presented in a second full sentence: "El ia nase a 14 marto 1876 en Ulm en Deutxland, e ia mori a 18 april 1955 en Princeton, SUA." (Also, it doesn't make sense to explain the pronunciation of "Princeton" in the Einstein article: it should be in the Princeton article.) Etymologies are often top-heavy in a similarly awkward way, e.g. at Economia. The first sentence should define "economy"; the etymology is a minor detail, and can surely wait until a later paragraph or section. However, since top-heavy articles are so prevalent on Wikipedia, I assume there's an editorial decision to prefer them. I'd be fascinated to know the reasoning. Simon **I completely agree. Those over-full intros drive me crazy. A short intro to the subject is far better. Also, any information sufficiently important to go into the main body of the text should be presented in complete sentences and in context. And simple things like numbers should go in the template. jorj Sorry, now I don't know what should we do. Which country template should we keep? The one with the population, governors and GDP data or the one without it? I really don't mind using one or the other, I'm fine with anyone. But if we use the one with that data probably won't be updated so if you don't like it we'd better use the simpler one. Chabi (talk) 17:40, May 18, 2017 (UTC) *It's a very difficult question! Populations and governors are typical of the sort of thing people use Wikipedia to look up, so they need to be included; but there's no point in including them if they're inevitably going to get out of date. This is the main reason I seldom consult the Esperanto Wikipedia, even though I speak Esperanto fluently – I can't trust the accuracy of the content. It's a pity Wikipedia doesn't store these basic facts about people and things in a single central database, with each language then extracting and formatting the data into the relevant articles. I know I haven't answered your question, but I honestly don't know what the answer is. Perhaps you should decide, based on your experience with the Jamaican Wikipedia. Simon **again, I think including dates for those kinds of data would be sufficient. jorj *** Hi jorj, thanks for your comment. The issue with dates is that some data for population is from 2004 for instance so it wouldn't be that accurate. Shall we then keep the population but adding a date Simon? Also, how about GDP and governors? Maybe GDP we can add a date and take out the information about the governors? Regarding the central database, indeed, Wikipedia has one: Wikidata. But I am afraid I am not proficient enough to create a template using that kind of data. Latin Wikipedia does it and I presume that's the way of being accurate, however, as aforementioned, I wouldn't be able to do it. Thanks for your feedback :) --Chabi (talk) 19:41, May 18, 2017 (UTC) ***Very interesting about Wikidata: as you can tell, I had no idea that even existed. It looks extremely thorough… and hellishly complicated. Anyway, having read Jorj's arguments above, I agree that adding a date to the population is the best we can do for now. GDP with date would be good, too. I think we have to discard the governor information. We should concentrate on articles we can do well — those that consist mainly of unchanging or historical facts. Simon ***Module:Wikidata isn't available on the incubator, so we couldn't use it even if we wanted to. There's a small amount of documentation about how to use it, if we ever wanted to. Simon *By the way, where is the page of recent changes for just the Elefen WP? I think I found it once by accident a couple of months ago, but didn't bookmark it, and have never found it again. Simon If you log in, you can see on the top right corner of your browser different tags (your user name, discussion page, preferences, etc.). You click on preferences, and on the page that appears, under the title Internationalisation, select: * Lingua Franca Nova on Lingua tab * Wikipedia on the Test Wiki tab * lfn on Test Wiki Language Click on accept at the bottom of the page. Now you will see that on the left-hand side of your browser (where recent changes appears) LFN1.png LFN2.png LFN.png *Excellent! Many thanks for your help. Simon Leonardo Me es corente (lenta) tradui la article de Leonardo da Vinci de engles a elefen. Esce mea tradui es oce? Me debe continua esta o tradui otra articles? Angel *Continua! La tradui no es mal, ma conteni alga eras. Me va coreti los en la incubador, e me va esplica alga de los asi, per aida tua comprende. Simon **Tu ia omete "ia" ante multe verbos en la raconta. **"Polimata" no esiste. Nos usa "erudita". **"la areas de interesa de ci" — "whose X" es normal "de ci sua X". Lo es plu fasil per leje. Simil "de ci cada" en loca de "cada de ci". **"nomida variosa" — la ordina de la du parolas nesesa es reversada (tu ia scrive "namedly various"), e "diversa" es plu bon ca "variosa" en multe casos. "Variosa" sinifia "full of variety", "full of variations", ma "various" en engles sinifia comun mera "miscellaneous" o "a number of different" o "several". **"es considerada comun un de" — Personal, me prefere usa "regarda" en loca de "considera"/"vide" cuando "is considered" indica un opina jeneral. "Considera" sinifia "esamina par pensa", no "opina". E on nesesa ajunta "como" ("es comun regardada como un de"), car la strutur "they elected me president", "I find the wine horrible", "we consider you a friend" no esiste en elefen. **"cada tempo" es "each quantity of time". "All time" es "tota (la) tempo". **La plural "algunes" no esiste. **"atribui el con" — La defini de "atribui" en la disionaro indica ce la ojeto (entre brasetas en la defini) es la cualia, no la person, donce on nesesa dise "atribui … a el". **"la metodos empirical el ia usada" — On no pote omete "cual", an si on tende omete "that/which" en tal frases en engles. **"Pos," — Esta es un averbo ("poste" en esperanto), e nos dise "a pos" per clari esta en elefen. **"François I de Frans" — Nos prefere evita numeros roman, car los es min internasional. Scrive "François 1 de Frans" en loca. **"la plu reproduida depinta relijial" — Per alga razona, multe persones era cuando los tradui "the most". "Reproduced" es un ajetivo, donce lo debe segue la nom, e "most" esije ce on repete "la" (car "plu" sin "la" sinifia "more"). La resulta coreta es "la depinta relijial la plu reproduida". **"ma ancora" — "Ancora" es un parola de tempo. "Still" en engles pote sinifia ance "however", "nonetheless", per cual la espresa la plu comun en elefen es "an tal" (even so). **"competeada" — La verbo "rival" manca en la disionario, ma "egali" (become an equal) pare conveni. ("Competeda" pare bizara, car la verbo "compete" es nontransitiva; un person competeda ta es un person ci on ia compete, pd on ia fa ce la person compete.) **"Esta ta produi" — "Would" es enganosa en engles. Lo ave multe sinifias diferente, e "ta" representa sola la sinifia ipotesal. En multe casos, "would" indica la futur de la pasada = "was going to". Ma en esta frase, lo es mera un modo complicada de espresa la tempo pasada. **"en sua bebia" — Me pensa ce "in their infancy" es un idiom engles. An si la metafor es relativa clar, lo pare alga strana (car tecnicas siensal es nunca bebes). Ta ce on trova un otra manera de espresa la idea. **"entra la mundo nonespetada" — Prima, on entra a'' un loca. Du, "nonespetada" descrive la modo de entra, no la mundo, donce lo debe apare direta pos "entra". **"ave influe direta sur siensa" — "Have" es multe usada en tal espresas en engles, ma min en otra linguas. "Have influence on" sinifia no plu ca "influence": "influe la siensa". **"nase la 15 april 1452" — Per indica datas, usa "a" (normal sin "la": nos trata "15 april 1452" como un formula spesial, sin "la" e sin "de".) **"la site de Vinci", "la vileta de Anchiano" — Nos omete "de" en tal espresas, car la site no ''parteni a Vinci: lo es Vinci! Simil: "la mense maio", no "la mense de maio", e multe otras. **"ia indica ce la padre de Leonardo ia es un senior" — La regula per tal frases es ce en la frase reportada ("ce el es un senior") on usa la mesma tempo como si on ta dise direta: "el es un senior". Esta es importante sola cuando la verbo xef ("indica") es pasada: en engles, nos dise "it indicated that he was…", ma a la tempo de la indica mesma, el es un senior, donce en elefen (como en multe otra linguas) nos dise "ia indica ce el es un senior". "Ia es" asi ta sinifia "it indicated that he had been". (Simil, "they said that they would come" es "los ia dise ce los va veni", car lo cual los ia dise es: "Nos va veni.") **"Pico es sabeda" — Plu simple: "on sabe poca". Deveni la ami de "on"! Lo pote crea frases multe plu fasil ca los con verbos pasiva cual infesta engles. **"e … e …" es bon per "both … and …", ma cuando la partes es longa, lo pote deveni alga nonclar per leje. En tal casos, me prefere dise "no sola … ma ance …" **"ia demanda per Ser Piero fa lo pintada per el" — Verbos infinitiva no funsiona tal en elefen. Tu debe usa "ce" e dise "ia demanda ce Ser Piero fa ce on pinti lo per el". **"ornada con un cor perforada con un flexa" — La flexa perfora la cor, donce la cor es perforada par la flexa. "Con" es ance posible, ma min clar — e lo es serta min bon en esta frase car tu ia usa ja "con" pos "ornada". *Me va continua doman, si tu vole. Ma tua tradui es vera eselente, an si me ia trova alga puntos pedante. (Me pote sempre trova puntos pedante, an en mea propre traduis pos la pasa de alga tempo :-) Simon **Multe grasias! Esta es un aida grande a me! Me ia deside tradui articles no sola per aida la incubador, ma ance per aprende elefen. :) Angel **Si, me ia suposa lo :) Me regrete ce nos no ofre materias plu bon per ensenia tal puntos (cual es eras comun de aprendores). Multe de la puntos apare ja en la gramatica, ma acel es un documento relativa formal e lo no asentua la locas do persones tende era. E alga de la puntos es mera stilal, per cual la solve refinada en elefen difere de engles. Cisa, a pos, nos pote edita esta lista e usa lo como la funda de un documento nova per aprendores engles. Serta on ave tal libros de eras comun en esperanto, e me ia es multe aidada par los cuando me ia aprende acel lingua. Simon **"un de la plu amirable en Firenze" — Lo es un de los (plural), donce vera on debe dise "la plu amirables" (o ajunta un nom plural: "un du la laborerias la plu amirable"). **Un punto nongramatical: La du frases prima en la parte sur la laboreria de Verrocchio es strana editada en engles, e donce ance en tua tradui. Cada de la du pare crede ce lo es la frase prima sur Verrocchio, e ambos presenta lo como un person nova. On ta pote malcomprende ce "Andrea di Cione" e "Andrea del Verrocchio" es du persones diferente. **"la depintor e scultor fiorentin grado prima de sua tempo" — La testo engles dise "leading", e tu ia reconose coreta ce "gidante" no conveni per tradui esta. Ma la nom "grado prima" no pote es usada como un ajetivo, an si "first rate" funsiona tal en engles. "La plu importante" conveni. Ance "xef" o "major", cisa. **"ia va continua" — On no pote combina "ia" e "va". En esta frase, "ia" sufisi: lo es un plu esemplo de la usa complicada de "would" en engles. La mesma es vera en "Leonardo ta ia es esposada". En otra frases, do on vole refere a la futur de un momento pasada, on pote simple usa "va". **"ia stajiada o asosiada" — "Ia" presede un verbo simple: "la depintores ia asosia". On no usa lo en otra situas, como asi: "associated painters" es "depintores asosiada". Fundal, la fini "-ed" en engles pote deveni o "-da" o "ia" en elefen, ma no ambos. **"inclui" (including) — Per alga razona, multe persones scrive "inclui" en loca de "incluinte", e "eseta" en loca de "esetante". Pos alga frases, tu scrive ance "usa" en loca de "usante". **"esta es crededa es apocrifa" — Esta es un bon esemplo de la problem de tradui pasivas e infinitivas de engles. Nos dise "this is believed to be apocryphal" en engles, ma "on crede ce" es multe plu bela ca "esta es crededa" e lo permete ance ajunta la resta de la frase sin problem. "Esta es crededa es apocrifa" no es gramatical coreta; lo ta es la forma pasiva de "on crede esta es apocrifa", cual es ance nongramatical (car, como diseda a supra, la strutur "they elected me president" no esiste en elefen). **"Esamina curante" — "Cura" sinifia "care for" o "take care of" (on cura un malada o un cosa danada, per esemplo). "Careful" es usual "atendente" (paying attention). Cuando on comensa un frase con un nom verbal, me recomenda ajunta "un" o "la" per clari, car la lejor pote malcomprende la parola como un verbo de comanda: "Carefully examine!" **"ia es ajusta" — "ia es ajustada" ("were adjusted", not "were adjust"). Compara "me ajusta lo" (I adjust it), "me ia ajusta lo" (I adjusted it), "me es ajustante lo" (I am adjusting it), "me ia es ajustante lo" (I was adjusting it), "lo es ajustante" (it is adjusting), "lo ia es ajustante" (it was adjusting), "lo es ajustada" (it is adjusted), "lo ia es ajustada" (it was adjusted). "Ia es" es la verbo. "Ajustante/ajustada" es mera un ajetivo, simil a "bon" en "lo ia es bon". **"rieta de monte brun" — La cosa brun es la rieta, no la monte, donce nos dise "rieta brun de monte". **"an pos sua padre ia institui el" — "Before" e "after" pote es difisil. Los ave tre sinifias en engles, e elefen distingui la tre. Compara: "ante la come" (preposada: before the meal, antaŭ la manĝo), "ante cuando nos come" (conjunction: before we eat, antaŭ ol ni manĝas), "nos come a ante" (averbo: we eat beforehand, ni manĝas antaŭe). On nesesa considera esce "before/after" introdui un nom, un frase, o no cosa. En la tradui tu nesesa "an pos cuando sua padre ia institui el", car "sua padre ia institui el" es un frase.